Obama & the economy

Graphic to the left found via Exurban League with a link to a report regarding the nationwide unemployment rate. So that's what that graphic represents. That link is to a CNN story ironically.

The nation's unemployment rate rose above 10% for the first time since 1983 in October, a much worse jump than expected as employers continued to trim jobs from payrolls.

The reading, reported by the government Friday, is a sign of the continued weakness in the labor market even though the economy grew in the third quarter following the longest and deepest downturn since the Great Depression.

The government reported that the unemployment rate spiked to 10.2%, up from 9.8% in September. It is the highest that this rate has been since April 1983. Economists had forecast an increase to 9.9%.

There was also a net loss of 190,000 jobs in October, according to the Labor Department, an improvement from a revised estimate of 219,000 job losses in September. However, economists surveyed by Briefing.com had forecast a loss of only 175,000 jobs in October. This was the 22nd straight month of job losses.

The green economy hasn't provided much opportunity according to this story from the Washington Post:

In Baltimore, the 300 block of East 23 1/2 Street is getting patched up in time for winter. One economic stimulus program is paying to insulate 11 rental rowhouses, another is paying for furnaces and a third is covering the cost for reflective roofs to be installed by prison inmates in a job-training program.

The block is part of one of the biggest initiatives ever undertaken by the federal government, a nationwide push to improve the energy efficiency of buildings. But as the national unemployment rate crosses into the double digits and Republicans question the stimulus program's impact, the work on East 23 1/2 -- even with all of its activity -- has so far not produced a single job.

Nine months after Congress passed the $787 billion stimulus package, there is little tangible to show for one of its biggest single areas of investment, the $25 billion energy-efficiency effort. That points to one of the central tensions of President Obama's landmark stimulus package: His goal was to inject money quickly into the economy while at the same time laying the groundwork for his broader, transformational agenda on energy, education and health care.

Officials overseeing the energy-efficiency effort want to fundamentally alter the way the country uses energy. They are trying to craft initiatives that will produce real savings to build the case for continued private or public investment. And they are putting safeguards in place to avoid any spending scandals that could tarnish the effort.

All this deliberation comes with a tradeoff: The full force of the spending will likely not be felt until well into next year, potentially undermining the job-creating aim of the stimulus.

Another article suggesting that Obama's stimulus has failed:

Since the $787 billion stimulus was passed in February, the economy has lost 2.9 million jobs - for a total of 4.3 million since the end of 2008. The silver lining, some say, is the number of jobs lost each month is shrinking. But they lose sight of this: There's no guarantee the economy's 3.5% growth in the third quarter will continue.

Indeed, some worry the economy is on a slow-growth path that will lead to permanently high joblessness, weaker income growth and fewer opportunities. The Blue Chip consensus of more than 50 economists nationwide expects unemployment to remain above 8% at least into 2012.

Why should this be? Well, start with the fact that virtually all job growth comes from companies with fewer than 500 employees, and that startups and very small businesses are responsible for more than half of all new jobs.

Today, these entrepreneurial job creators are running scared. That the White House vows to jack up taxes on those with "high incomes" (that is, entrepreneurs) is one reason why. Next year's scheduled expiration of the Bush tax cuts that pulled the economy out of the 2001 recession is another.

Higher income taxes, a flood of stiff new regulations and the possibility of at least $2 trillion in new taxes related to cap-and-trade and a health care overhaul over the next decade have created a climate of uncertainty - for small and large businesses alike.

Businesses are hunkered down. They have $1 trillion in cash stashed away, but they won't invest out of fear it'll be taxed away or some government czar will tell them how to run their business.

And now for the final point, that this is now Obama's economy!

Fast forward. On Friday, the Bureau of Labor Statistics released unemployment figures for October 2009. The official rate was 10.2 percent, up more than 50 percent from the time Obama gave that speech. Oops, nevermind.

(By the way, the underemployment rate, which includes part-time workers who want to work full time and those who’ve given up searching, is a staggering 17.5 percent.)

Job creation has dropped from top priority to one of many, and President Obama has been remanded to pandering for patience and offering excuses. On the one hand, he argues the tortured rationale that there is good news in the awful numbers: Things are still getting worse but at a slower pace. On the other, he incessantly reminds us that he inherited the crisis. The implication: Don’t blame me, blame Bush.

But this president can’t keep deflecting to the last one. Pain is presently felt. The crisis that took form on Bush’s watch is being experienced on Obama’s. Fair or not, finger-pointing is not effective policy.

This is now Obama’s crisis, and it carries political consequences. During Tuesday’s gubernatorial races in New Jersey and Virginia, nearly 9 in 10 voters said that they were worried about the direction of the nation’s economy in the next year. And the majority of those who held that view voted for the Republican candidates. This could portend a flashback to 1994.

I don't know. It seems things are moving at a crawl currently. What say you out there?

Joseph Cao was the lone GOP vote for the health care legislation

Before we get to the man who replaced William Jefferson in the US House of Representatives let's look at what was actually in this legislation:

The House of Representatives Saturday passed, by a 220-215 vote, historic health-care overhaul legislation that would require virtually all Americans to obtain health insurance and create a government-run health insurance plan to help them do so.

If passed by the Senate, the bill would bring about the most sweeping changes in the American health care system since Medicare was created 44 years ago.
...
In addition to creating the so-called public option government-run insurance program, the House-passed bill would bar insurers from denying people coverage because of pre-existing conditions and set up health care "exchanges," or marketplaces, where consumers could easily shop for coverage.

The changes are expected to mean that by 2019, 96 percent of eligible Americans would have health insurance, up from the current 83 percent.
...
A bigger boost may have come from a deal to bar coverage by government-subsidized insurance policies of elective abortions.

As originally written, the measure would have required insurers to separate public and private money, so that only private funds could be used for elective abortions. Abortion opponents were concerned that such a policy would effectively expand the government's role in improving access to abortion, and as many as 40 Democrats threatened to withhold support from the health care bill unless changes were made.

I'm somewhat bothered by something else I heard in this provision, that we have to have insurance or face fines for not having insurance. That's a very unfortunate provision and people would liken this to Massachusettes, hopefully I can find something that indicates that costs in Massachusettes are only going up. The issue is costs here so how do we bring down costs.

Anyway this blog post from And So it Goes in Shreveport discusses Joseph Cao. It seems as if this blogger may have already seen this coming from him:

Why did Cao vote yes? He'll surely offer explanations in the days ahead, but we could see it coming. This is what he said in August:

"At the end of the day if the health care reform bill does not have strong language prohibiting the use of federal funding for abortion, then the bill is really a no-go for me," said Cao, who studied to be a Jesuit priest. 

"Being a Jesuit, I very much adhere to the notion of social justice," Cao said. "I do fully understand the need of providing everyone with access to health care, but to me personally, I cannot be privy to a law that will allow the potential of destroying thousands of innocent lives.

"I know that voting against the health care bill will probably be the death of my political career," Cao said, "but I have to live with myself, and I always reflect on the phrase of the New Testament, 'How does it profit a man's life to gain the world but to lose his soul.' "

Cao's district has been Democratic since 1891. He won the seat in 2008, defeating William "Cold Cash" Jefferson who was then facing 16 felony indictments.

The district represents almost all of New Orleans and the demographics are 30% White, 64% Black, and a small percentage of Asian, Hispanic, and Native American.

For his part, Cao has always made it clear that he would vote to represent his constituents. In a December 2008 interview with NPR, Cao expressed some frustration with the Republican party who he says "ignored" his campaign until they saw that he might win. He says it was not until three weeks before the election that the Republican establishment finally kicked in to help him defeat Jefferson. Governor Bobby Jindal didn't offer an endorsement of Cao until three days before the election.

Then you have to consider what Cao calls the Hurricane Effect. Katrina had displaced lots of voters. The election had been delayed by Hurricane Gustav in early September. Only 66,000 voters participated in the election.

And when you think about it, this makes a lot of sense. Unfortunately, that's not going to put a lot of Republicans at ease as many of them would rather he votes the party line. He might get re-elected there or he may face a decent Democratic challenger and absolutely little help from Republicans.

Besides it was noted that he started getting Republican votes when they realized that he might win. If I understand correctly Louisiana's run-off electoral system may have played a role in Cao's ascension to Congress. Although all things being considered William Jefferson, the man who was convicted of corruption that year, should have been doomed. However, this may not have been his year being weakend in a primary run-off and then having to face Cao in December.

In that election in December turnout was even more depressed. If I understand correctly, people were just confused they may have thought the election was over. Who knows they may have been disenchanted and stayed home. It enabled a Cao win.

The question here is what would this mean in the future for Joseph Cao can he live this vote down?

The Myth of '08, Demolished

So where has this new transformation that an Obama presidency was supposed to bring at?

In the aftermath of last year's Obama sweep, we heard endlessly about its fundamental, revolutionary, transformational nature. How it was ushering in an FDR-like realignment for the 21st century in which new demographics -- most prominently, rising minorities and the young -- would bury the GOP far into the future. One book proclaimed "The Death of Conservatism," while the more modest merely predicted the terminal decline of the Republican Party into a regional party of the Deep South or a rump party of marginalized angry white men.

This was all ridiculous from the beginning. 2008 was a historical anomaly. A uniquely charismatic candidate was running at a time of deep war weariness, with an intensely unpopular Republican president, against a politically incompetent opponent, amid the greatest financial collapse since the Great Depression. And still he won by only seven points.

Exactly a year later comes the empirical validation of that skepticism. Virginia -- presumed harbinger of the new realignment, having gone Democratic in '08 for the first time in 44 years -- went red again. With a vengeance. Barack Obama had carried it by six points. The Republican gubernatorial candidate won by 17 -- a 23-point swing. New Jersey went from plus 15 Democratic in 2008 to minus 4 in 2009. A 19-point swing.

What happened? The vaunted Obama realignment vanished. In 2009 in Virginia, the black vote was down by 20 percent; the under-30 vote by 50 percent. And as for independents, the ultimate prize of any realignment, they bolted. In both Virginia and New Jersey they'd gone narrowly for Obama in '08. This year they went Republican by a staggering 33 points in Virginia and by an equally shocking 30 points in New Jersey.

I think Obama had a solid win last year, but one just has to note the anger and discontent out there. Some of it a result of undue expectations on the new President. Some of it may well be about deep disagreement with the policies enacted by the President. Oh and some of it may be personal, but then that's to be expected in politics, because you're on the "other side" people are not going to like you much anyway.

All the same I believe that New Jersey has to be the worse loss from Tuesday. A Democratic state with a Democratic incumbent Governor who was a self-funder and even had Obama campaigning for him. It didn't happen!

Still we're a long way from seeing whether or not the Obama magic has faded.

RELATED:
Can This State Be Saved? - National Review
New Jersey in November '09; Illinois in November '10? - Proft for Governor
The Obama magic has faded - New York Post

The recent elections provided some recent posts

Before Monday I hadn't posted in a little under a week. I want to really reflect on the elections in New Jersey and Virginia where Republicans were elected Governor of those respective states. But now it's bed time and I really don't want to start on such a post at this late time.

The only reason I'm posting this is to continue some sort of consistency in my posts that has been lacking since I graduated in May. I have skipped two or three days in the past but never a week for no good reason (excepting vacation or spring break or whatever). So I want to be sure to let you know what I have in mind before you think that I'm playing hooky from here.

ABC: Breaking ground in Atlanta

This is the story from Nightline discussing Mary Norwood. An Atlanta City Councilwoman who will face off against Georgia State Sen. Kasim Reed next month in the race for that city's mayoralty. Norwood may be the first white mayor in a little over 30 years after a string of black mayors of that southern city from Maynard Jackson to the outgoing Shirley Franklin.

ABC video about mayoral race in ATL

Looking for online video of the Nightline segment on the ATL mayoral race. Found this instead segment probably aired on ABC's World News Tonight on Tuesday. It should set the scene for what's going on there. Like I said blacks would race see another black win the race, almost like many blacks up here in Chicago. There is some hope GA State Sen. Kasim Reed will face off against City Councilwoman Mary Norwood on Dec. 2nd. As an added bonus Houston, TX could elect an openly lesbian mayor.

If that video of that Nightline segment is ever uploaded, I'll be sure to link to it!

Tomorrow is Election Day somewhere

There are three races to watch tomorrow. Mainly two gubernatorial contests in Virginia and New Jersey in addition to a special election for a congressional seat in New York.

That race in New York has generated some publicity this past weekend as the original GOP candidate, Dede Scozzafava, withdrew from the race and endorsed Bill Ownens, Democratic candidate in that race. Scozzafava has a lot of GOP money behind her but the third party candidate Conservative Party nominee Doug Hoffman really galvanized conservatives or in fact, "The Tea Party" movement. Needless to say Scozzafava (a member of the NY State Assembly) may have won herself a few enemies amongst Republicans whether conservative or not.

Who knows how that race will turn out tomorrow. One Governor's race may be won in Virginia but there's less certainty about New Jersey. Like in NY there are three candidate's vying for that state's governorship. There is a third party candidate and he's expected to pull some votes away from the upstart Republican, Chris Christie.

The incumbent, Jon Corzine, already has the advantage of incumbency but there is a good chance that people have a bitter taste in their mouth about him. If that's true then the third party candidacy may not be a big problem for New Jersey voters.

BTW, the video above is from last week's Hannity. A focus group of mostly New Jersey Democrats talking about their upcoming gubernatorial election. A lot of interesting comments to be had there.

If you want to know why I'm paying attention, let's just say that these elections might be a barometer of sorts for the upcoming midterm elections next year. These three races will be touted as a referendum on President Obama. Of course if that's to be beleived we'll know for sure in November 2010.

Also another race of interest is in Atlanta. The bits and pieces of news from the city that's home to Morehouse College and Spelman College is that a credible white could be elected mayor of the city too busy to hate this year. Blacks are struggling to get behind a black candidate so that they may feel like they remain in control of a city that has had a black mayor since the early 70s.

(Can anyone say Maynard Jackson!?!?)

Anyway the race angle is somewhat shocking. It might be something I would expect from Chicago. For example concern over losing the Cook County Board Presidency has caused a group of Black ministers to convalesce around incumbent Todd Stroger. Stroger is already a weak candidate thanks to a number of factors mainly how he got in and his high sales tax.

The Black ministers' concern is over the plethora of other Blacks running for Todd Stroger's job next year with Dorothy Brown, Ald. Toni Preckwinkle, and Congressman Danny Davis (who also just so happen to have recently filed papers to run for re-election to his 7th Congressional Seat). Them in addition to Terry O'Brien from the Water Reclamation District who is Irish. Concern 4 Blacks in this race could split the Black vote and allow a white man to get elected county board president.

Unfortunately in their case they may have picked a losing horse. All the same, whether the eventual nominee is an Irish white man or any of the black candidates or even the Republican, any or most of them could be an improvement over Stroger. But only after Nov. 2010 will we know for sure!

New Cubs owner Ricketts aims for Wrigley redo, Series win

The Cubs finally have a new owner. This historical National League team is no longer a Tribune Company outfit. It's now the property of The Ricketts family. Crain's lets us know some of their plans:

Making the rounds with Chicago media for the first time since his family’s $845-million acquisition of the storied franchise and ballpark, the new Cubs chairman made clear that the Ricketts era will be a departure from Tribune Co.’s 28-year run as owner. He plans to plow profits back into the organization, from paying top players to fixing the 95-year-old ballpark’s cramped concessions, clubhouses and commodes.

“There are a couple differences between the Tribune owning the team and the family owning the team,” Mr. Ricketts said in an interview Thursday. “We’re committed to reinvesting the profits into preserving and improving the stadium. We’re going to be delivering on that over the next few years.”

The family’s goal is to win the Cubs’ first World Series championship in 101 years. “When that happens, it’s going to be special,” he said. “That’s the goal. Undoubtedly it will happen on our watch.”

But fans shouldn’t expect Mr. Ricketts to throw money around like the New York Yankees’ George Steinbrenner, whose payroll tops $200 million. Mr. Ricketts said there would likely be a “slight increase” of the Cubs’ $140-million payroll next season, but noted that it’s already the third-highest in baseball.

He’ll cede all personnel decisions to his general manager — for now, Jim Hendry, whom he said has done “a great job.”

Fans can expect “slight increases” in ticket prices for next season, and “inflation-like” increases thereafter. That would be far less aggressive than the price hikes Tribune has pushed through in recent years, some of which exceeded 30%.

It's gotta be a baseball fans dream to own the team you're already a die-hard fan.

That reminds me, how long was Reinsdorf the owner of the White Sox and was finally able to bring home a World Series in 2005? Probably close to 25 or so years before he made that happen. Let's hope Ricketts and the Cubs will not take nearly as long.

Crain's also have a video on this so check it out!

VIDEO: Make Mine Freedom

This cartoon was made in 1948. Perhaps a bit ahead of its time especially with the mention of racial division. The nation was segregated back then, but the point stands even today as racial division is an issue.

Of course that's not the only issue involved therein however the messages contained here is as important today as it was then. Especially since America was about to enter a cold war with the Communist block.

Via The Bench!

Garrard McClendon interviews Tavis Smiley

From what I can tell this is the earliest video of Garrard McClendon. Video was posted onto YouTube in 2006. I'm not totally sure when he started his TV career I just know that his CLTV talk show has been on since summer 2008. Here's his YouTube account.

Well I didn't post this as a history lesson. I posted because of the news that his parents were found murdered in a forest preserve near Calumet City, Illinois. His parents stolen car found on the Dan Ryan Expressway. I can only imagine that this is very devastating to him.

I would like for anyone who supports his program to keep him in YOUR thoughts. Hopefully he'll return to his program as soon as possible, but hopefully he'll take all the time he needs.

"Porch monkeys"

Zonation takes on the epithet offered by Warren Ballentine to Juan Williams on FNC's O'Reilly Factor Thursday night. I heard Ballentine's comment telling Williams to "get back on the porch". I knew it had some context but unsure as to what that context was. Either way Williams guest hosted Bill O'Reilly's show on Friday night and O'Reilly was back tonight to discuss with Williams and Mary Katherine Ham.

The more it is over analyzed the more it's apparent that this really was an offensive thing to say. Zo in this video says that Ballentine was effectively calling Williams a "porch monkey". It was his way of saying that he didn't like the fact that Williams wasn't agreeing with him.

Also lost in that debate on Thursday night was Ballentine's reference to "real black people". Another way of saying that Ballentine believes that most blacks will be likely to agree with him and dismiss those who don't.

As far as political differences in the black community it's unfortunate that there are those who choose to go this route. We could agree to disagree but why take the whole if you disagree with the "prevailing opinion" of black folks then something is wrong with you. So in my learning experience this is another instance of nastiness when two blacks may not agree with each other.

BTW, Juan is in no way a conservative but he was on the wrong side of this debate. These terms could be just as easily used against black conservatives or anyone who may not adhere to the generally progressive, liberal, or Democratic establishment amongst blacks. Also this segment was basically over the news regarding Rush Limbaugh and his attempt to own an interesting in the St. Louis Rams.

Morehouse College makes Instapundit

Glenn Reynolds relays:

THOSE “CHRISTIANISTS” ARE EVERYWHERE: Morehouse College Bans Cross-Dressing.

Not entirely sure what that means. Perhaps expressing that there are those who might see this as a way Christians are asserting themselves against an oppressed minority. Especially since Morehouse has a dress that also bans men who cross dress!

If you don't know about Glenn Reynolds' Instapundit, it's one of the most popular blogs in the blogosphere. The posts are dominated by the issues of politics, war, even technology. All the other posts involves basically the news of the day. Such as this item about Morehouse.

Of course you don't have to click that last link in the blockquotes. It's a CNN article but you can always check Saturday's post which contains a CNN video.